Who will the earth swallow?

Hebrew

וַיִּקַּח קֹרַח בֶּן־יִצְהָר בֶּן־קְהָת בֶּן־לֵוִי וְדָתָן וַאֲבִירָם בְּנֵי אֱלִיאָב וְאוֹן בֶּן־פֶּלֶת בְּנֵי רְאוּבֵן׃ וַיָּקֻמוּ לִפְנֵי מֹשֶׁה...

And took Korach, son of Izhar son of Kohath son of Levi, and Dathan and Abiram sons of Eliav, and On son of Peleth, sons of Reuben, and rose upbefore Moses. (Numbers 16:1)[1] 

What did Korach take?

Even if you read the text of the Torah carefully, you won’t know because it doesn’t say.  “Took” here is a transitive verb without an object. Translators and commentators try to fill in the blank but the lack itself has meaning: it doesn’t matter what Korach took. The opening verb of the story is not intended to advance the plot; it provides background information about Korach. He takes what he wants, when he wants it, because he thinks he deserves it.

Rabbi Eliyahu Dessler (Lithuania, 1892-Israel, 1953) discusses people like this, “Two powers – נתינה giving and נטילה taking – form the roots of all character traits and of all actions.”[2] For Rabbi Dessler the power of giving is the substance of humanity being created in God’s image. Its opposite is “the faculty of taking, by contrast a person aspires to draw to himself all that comes within his reach. This is what people call egotism or selfishness. It is the root of all evil…” 

In the Torah portion, Korach desires political and ritual power. In the Talmud, Korach is known as an especially wealthy person who who took treasures that Joseph had hidden in Egypt (Sanhedrin 110a). It could even be that Korach thought he deserved political power because of his wealth. There’s a hint of this direction in the text itself where it notes twice, “and the earth opened its mouth and swallowed them up with their households, all Korah’s people and all their possessions. They went down alive into Sheol, with all that belonged to them….” (Num. 16:32-33).[3] 

Motivated by the power of taking Korach and his allies bring destruction upon themselves. To my mind there is actually a natural aspect to their supernatural demise: the strong connection between humanity אדם and landאדמה . The earth “knows” what to do with people who grab more than their share. But sometimes the natural consequences are delayed. Therefore when Moses proposes-prays “But if the Eternal creates a creation so that the ground opens its mouth and swallows them up…” (Num. 16:30), his intention is not necessarily for an entirely new creation but rather for an instance of an already existing power, here and now.[4] The miracle is in the precision. The earth opened it in mouth and swallowed only the guilty parties. Generally, natural disasters do not distinguish between good people and bad. Or perhaps we are all guilty?

Even if we aren’t all guilty, all humans bear responsibility for the relationship between humanity and the earth. From the perspective of Jewish tradition, this responsibility is derived from being created God’s image, which includes the power of giving described by Rabbi Dessler, but is more expansive and complex. This survey presents a few key sources that can serve as inspiration when the responsibility seems too heavy and convenience beckons us to ignore it.

One of the strongest statements to this effect among the classical commentators is Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra (Spain, 1089-c. 1167) on “The heavens belong to the Eternal and the earth God gave to humanity” (Psalm 115:16): “Ignorant people think that the humanity’s rule over the earth is like God’s rule in heaven, but they do not speak correctly because God’s rule is everywhere. The meaning of ‘the earth God gave to humanity’ is that people are like clerks of God on earth, over all that is on earth, but everything is [ruled by] the word of God.”

Contemporary Bible scholar Prof. Tikva Frymer-Kensky (1943-2006) explains that this is indeed the meaning of the word צלם in the phrase “in the Divine Image” (Genesis 1:26):

The essential position of humankind in the cosmos is not the farmer, but the executive. This is spelled out: humans are to be the tzelem Elohim, the image of God. Ṣalmu is a word we know from Mesopotamian inscriptions, where the king is the “image” of the god. It means the avatar of God on earth, the one who keeps everything going properly.[5] 

A person charged with guarding an asset for its owners knows full well that even if they are permitted to use a small portion, it is forbidden to destroy the asset or steal from it. When that asset is the earth, we somehow manage to forget. Already in 1951, Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel sounded a warning: 

It is amazing how thoughtless modern man is of his responsibility in relation to his world. He finds before him a world crammed to overflowing with wonderful materials and forces, and without hesitation or scruple he grasps at everything is within his reach… he is gradually changing the face of the earth.[6]

“Without hesitation or scruple he grasps at whatever is within his reach” sounds very much like the “taker” described by R. Dessler, very much like Korach. We’ve already seen what happened to him.

Elsewhere in Man is Not Alone, Rabbi Heschel defines the exploitation of nature as the “way of expediency” and calls for balancing it with “the way of wonder which deepens our appreciation in order to respond” to the world rather than exploit it. More than 70 years have passed, and the situation has deteriorated greatly in a world where consumerism is considered culture and economic growth prevails over growing food or the lives of workers.

A new Hebrew book, Sustainability from Genesis by Dr. Jonathan Aikhenbaum presents an environmentally-oriented reading of the book of Genesis, based Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik’s (Belarus, 1903-USA, 1993) understanding of the different stories about how humanity was created, as reported in the first two chapters of Genesis.[7] Very, very briefly: the human created in God’s image in the first chapter is creative and ambitious, interested in concrete benefits and property. This person asks about how the world operates in order to take advantage of its resources and use them effectively for human benefit. Conversely, the human created from the soil in the second chapter is a person of “experiences and sustainability” (Aikhenbaum’s term) who wonders about the substance of the world and humanity’s place within it. This person guards creation at all cost... Both of these aspects are present within every person and in every society. Humanity’s goal and purpose find the balance it makes the dignified human existence possible without being destructive and while acting responsibly towards future generations. 

Korach sinned by upsetting the balance with an unrestrained urge to take. To avoid his bitter fate we must realize the potential of the Divine Image in which we were created, and strive for responsible, balanced sustainability.

Shoshana Michael Zucker
Kehilat Hod veHadar, 5783

-----

[1] I have translated this and a few other verses very literally, to support the interpretive points.

[2] Strive for Truth, translated by Aryeh Carmell. 

[3] Rabbi Jonathan Neril, “Passing the Test of Wealth.”

[4] This may explain the contradiction between the usual understanding that Moses is asking for something entirely new and the claim in Pirkei Avot 5:6 that the mouth of the earth was created at twilight of the first Erev Shabbat. 

[5] “Ecology in a Biblical Perspective” in Torah of the Earth (2000). Additional sources and explanations on human responsibility for the earth, based on Tzelem Elohim, may be found here.

[6] Man is Not Alone (1951), pp. 290-91

[7] In Lonely Man of Faith. 

Parashat Shelah: The Travel Diary of Sethur Ben Michael from the Tribe of Asher

The third month, in the second year following the Exodus  

Hebrew

A full moon lights up the sky and I'm excited. In two days, I will set out to explore the land promised to our ancestors so many years ago. And to think that only a year and a few months ago we were slaves in Egypt. So many things have happened since then – the splitting of the Red Sea and revelation at Mount Sinai – but they was all one-time events. Soon we will settle down, as free people in our land. We were given detailed instructions on how to arrange the camp. The census showed us who is who in the large mass of people. We set out and all that remained was to enter the land and settle down.
I wish it were that simple.
Moses, in the name of God, promised that the land was good, but for many of the people, who have known only Egypt and the wilderness, it is hard to imagine a good land that depends on rain, that does not have the Nile to supply water regularly. Therefore, Moses appointed a chieftan from each tribe to a special delegation whose job it is to tour the land and see with our own eyes that it is good and to bring back examples to prove the point.

Day 12

We crossed the border without difficulty. After all, tourism is an important industry. We went to the Negev and to Hebron, an ancient city that was founded seven years before Zoan of Egypt.

Day 25

We reached Nahal Eshkol. We picked pomegranates, figs and a cluster of grapes that was so big that one person can't carry it, two of us carry it hanging from a pole. This is truly a land flowing with milk and honey, very impressive, and yet – despite the Divine promise – I’m beginning to doubt that we are strong enough, skilled enough and smart enough to cultivate and hold a land so different from what we knew.

Statue by Architect Sergio Ratescu, Segula Industrial Area, Petach Tikva. Photo: Dr. Avishi Teicher, https://commons.wikimedia.org

Day 28 (first day of the fifth month)

We started on our way back to Kadesh in the wilderness of Paran, discussing a report that we will submit when we arrive. There are many disagreements.

• Hosea (excuse me, Joshua) and Caleb are faithful and naïve. They see the difficulties but insist, “Let us by all means go up, and we shall gain possession of it, for we shall surely overcome it.”
• The fearful ones remember only the height of the fortifications and the strength of the people, especially the giants and the Amalekites, to whom we appeared as grasshoppers (or is it only in our eyes?). You simply can’t talk to them.
• There are those who dare to suggest that we should remain in the wilderness forever. They say, “It's a shame that we left the Mountain of God. Why should we work hard if we can eat manna and calmly study Torah forever.”[1]
• I understand the temptation, but the Torah also includes many mitzvot that an only be kept in the land – tithes, agricultural gifts, the sabbaitcal and jubilee years. Torah cannot be kept for long in the wilderness. Perhaps a compromise can be proposed: wait another two or three years to become stronger and learn the ins and outs of all those laws.

Day 40 (eight day of the fifth month)

We returned from exploring the land at the end of forty days, and reported directly to Moses, Aaron and the entire community.
In the final version, the fearful voices prevailed: “We came to the land you sent us to; it does indeed flow with milk and honey, and this is its fruit. However, the people who inhabit the country are powerful, and the cities are fortified and very large; moreover, we saw the Anakites and Amalekites there. We cannot attack that people, for it is stronger than we” Again and again they repeated the same things in an increasingly inflammatory tone.
Moses and Aaron were dumbstruck. I couldn't get a word in. Only Caleb managed to open his mouth but to no avail. The land was slandered.

God's patience ran out. Instead of two years of professional training and legal study, we received 38 years of punishment. And that was only after Moses reminded God that God is “slow to anger and abounding in kindness; forgiving iniquity and transgression.”

The thirty-second year after the Exodus

Sethur Ben Michael died overwhelmed with bitterness and the feeling that he had missed the opportunity to refute the libel report. Before his death, he gave his diary to his son Michael.

115 years after the Exodus (the 75th year of settlement of the land)

Today, I received the diary of my grandfather for whom I am named. I read it and cried for the generation lost in the wilderness and for the people who have not yet learned not to be dominated by fear.

---

[1] Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liadi, Likutei Torah, Shelah 1. This is the idea that sparked my imagination but the development and conclusion are my own.

Human Responsibility for the Earth

This post is based on a class in memory of my father, Paul Michael, given in Kehillat Hod veHadar on his first yahrzeit. Click here for a source sheet.

Genesis 1 tantalizingly tells us that humanity was created in God’s image, but the Torah never tells us what that means. In chapter 9, creation in God’s image is the reason for the prohibition against killing humans, and that is the last mention of the idea in the Bible. This silence created a broad canvas for commentators and philosophers to express their opinions and define the “the image of God,” the human traits that reflect the Divine. But my claim here is that no explanation was given because none was needed. For the people who first heard: 

וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים אֶת־הָאָדָם בְּצַלְמוֹ בְּצֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים בָּרָא אֹתוֹ זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה בָּרָא אֹתָם׃

And God created the human in God’s image, in the image of God, God created them; male and female God created them. ‎                                                                           Genesis 1:27

‎The language of being created in a God’s image was familiar, because it was regularly used to describe kings, in both Mesopotamia and Egypt.                                                                   

By declaring that the first humans, from all others descended, were created the divine image and reaffirming that claim after the flood when Noah re-establishes the human race, the Torah democratizes (Haim Cohen and Moshe Weinfeld, Olam HaTanakh [World of the Bible]) not only the image of God, but also sovereignty. Whatever political arrangements people later make are human arrangements, lacking any “divine right of kings.”

Dominion does not equal exploitation, two prominent academic Bible scholars, Prof. Jon D. Levenson:

The entire [human] race collectively stands vis-à-vis God in the same relationship of chosenness and protection that characterizes the god-king relationship in the more ancient civilizations of the Near East. “The image of God” is [God’s] chosen viceroy… Creation ends, as it were, with the commission of human agents to rule the world in the name of the creator God. (Creation and the Persistence of Evil [1994])

And  Prof. Tikva Frymer-Kensky:

The essential position of humankind in the cosmos is not the farmer, but the executive. This is spelled out: humans are to be the tzelem Elohim, the image of God. Ṣalmu is a term we know from Mesopotamian inscriptions, where the king is the “image” of the god. It means the avatar of God on earth, the one who keeps everything going properly. (“Ecology in a Biblical Perspective” in Torah of the Earth [2000].

I purposely quote both of these scholars because they come to the discussion from very different perspectives. Levenson is known to be a social conservative, while Frymer-Kensky was a staunch feminist. Their similar readings reinforces the point that this idea is truly in the text and not being read into it by interpreters with an “agenda.” 

Nonetheless, some environmental activists have claimed that the Bible is at fault for modern ecological disasters because it allows humanity to exploit nature ruthlessly (for example, Prof. Lynn White, Jr. (1967) “The historical roots of our ecologic crisis”), and some rabbis agree that humanity does indeed have that God-given power. For example, Nachmanides (R. Moshe ben Nachman or Ramban; Spain, 1194–c. 1270)‎ commenting on Genesis 1:28: “And subdue it:” wrote “He gave them power and rule ‎over the earth; to do whatever they wanted with the beasts and ‎the swarming animals and all of those that slither on the ground; ‎and to build and to uproot and plant and to quarry copper from its ‎hills and so on.”

‎However, many traditional Jewish commentators disagreed vehemently with the position. For example, Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra ‎(Spain, 1089-c. 1167)‎‏ ‏made the following comment on Psalm 115:16:

השמים שמים לה' והארץ נתן לבני־אדם

The heavens belong to the ETERNAL, but the earth God gave over to humanity.

Ignorant people think that the humanity’s ‎dominion over the Earth is like God’s dominion in heaven, but ‎they did not speak correctly because God’s rule is everywhere ‎and the meaning of “the earth God gave to humans” is that ‎people are like the clerks of God on earth over all that is on ‎earth, and everything is [ruled by] the word of God. ‎ ‎

In the 20th and 21st centuries, many rabbinic voices renewed the call to take human responsibility for the natural world, in increasingly stronger language. For example, Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel, wrote in one of his first books in English: 

But freedom in its turn implies responsibility, and man is responsible for the way in which he utilizes nature. It is amazing how thoughtless modern man is of his responsibility in relation to his world. He finds before him a world crammed to overflowing with wonderful materials and forces, and without hesitation or scruple he grasps at whatever is within his reach. Omnivorous in his desire, unrestrained in his efforts, tenacious in his purpose, he is gradually changing the face of the earth; and there seems to be none to deny him or challenge his eminence. Deluded by this apparent greatness, we give no thought to the question of what basis there is for our assumed right to possess our universe. Our own wayward desires and impulses, however natural they may be, are no title to ownership. Unmindful of this, we take our title for granted and grasp at everything, never questioning whether this may not be robbery. Powerhouse, factory and department store make us familiar with the exploitation of nature for our benefit. And lured by familiarity, the invisible trap for the mind, we easily yield to the illusion that these things are rightfully at our disposal, and think little of the sun, the rainfall, the water courses, as sources by no means rightfully our own. (Man is Not Alone (1951), pp. 290-91)

Rabbi Robert Gordis:  

[Humanity] is the responsible ruler of the created world. [Hu]man’s special position in the cosmos endows ‎him with special responsibilities, both to his own species and to all living creatures. He has an ‎obligation to preserve the life with which he has been endowed and so to order his society that it ‎promotes the life and well-being of its members. His dominion over the earth and its inhabitants is ‎not a license to destroy, but a responsibility to conserve the earth and its inhabitants, that which ‎God is created. To read into this passage permission for man to ride roughshod over other living ‎creatures or to despoil the earth of its treasures, or to pollute air and water, is to pervert the glory ‎of creation that is clearly indicated in the closing verse… Possessing a superior endowment, [humanity] is ‎empowered not to be a ruthless tyrant, but a responsible ruler of the world of nature. (Judaic Ethics for Lawless World (1986), p. 73)  

Rabbi Shai Held: 

The problem with the notion of human stewardship over creation is not that it authorizes human exploitation of the earth and abuse of the animal kingdom—which, as we have seen, it emphatically does not. The problem is, rather, that we have not really taken it seriously enough to try it. In modern times, amidst an almost manic need to produce and consume more and more, we have all too often lost sight of what has been entrusted to us. What we need is not to abandon Genesis 1 but to return to it and to re-discover there what we have forgotten or failed to see altogether. We are created in the image of God and are thus mandated to rule over creation; this is a call to exercise power in the way Tanakh imagines the ideal ruler would, “in obedience to the reign of God and for the sake of all the other creatures whom [our] power affects.” The approach laid out here overcomes one form of anthropocentrism—the crude notion that everything exists for us, and that we are therefore free to consume and dispense with it as we will–while affirming another: In contrast to the rest of creation, human beings are responsible and answerable for our actions.   (Bold added. “Created In God’s Image: Equality and Responsibility” (2015) and The Heart of Torah, vol. 1 (2017), p. 11).

It should now be clear that accepting and acting on this responsibility is urgent. If not now, there may not be another chance.

The Heritage of Yocheved

Parashat Shemot 5783: The Heritage of Yocheved

Hebrew

Confronted with the draconian decree, “Every boy that is born you shall throw into the Nile,” Yocheved – like tormented parents in every generation – separates from her son, hoping that her sacrifice will ensure him a better future. By luck, chance or divine providence, at that moment, Pharaoh’s daughter goes down to the Nile and sees the baby in the basket. Although she understands that he is one of the Hebrew children, and therefore sentenced to death, she has compassion on him. Before she says aloud that she intends to adopt the boy, his sister emerges from among the reeds and asks “Shall I go and get you a Hebrew nurse to suckle the child for you?” (Exodus 2:7). Without a second thought, Pharaoh’s daughter agrees and the rest of the story is well known.

As I told it just now, this is a story of oppression and hope featuring luck or chance (that might be providence), compassion, resourcefulness and a little bit more luck or chance (that might be again providence). The end is so promising that its almost possible to momentarily forget that it is all happening because of a horrible decree.

For a deeper look, I want to quote Rabbi Tali Adler who brings the fullness of life to the text and thereby reveals hidden layers:

The things you don’t realize until you’ve left the hospital without your baby and stayed up nights pumping milk because it is the one way, while she is in the hospital, that you can be a mother to your child:

• The bodies of childless mothers haunt the background of the beginning of Exodus. Women left after their babies have been taken, breasts still producing milk for the children that they will never feed.
• When Moshe’s sister asks if she should bring an Israelite woman to breastfeed the baby, there is a dark reality behind that question: in societies where enslaved women can have their babies wrenched away at any point, those same women are often forced to act as wet nurses for the children of their oppressors.
• If the Torah only wanted to tell the story of Moshe’s miraculous rescue it could have stopped as soon as Pharaoh’s daughter drew him out of the water. Instead, the Torah makes the choice to tell us about Moshe’s reunion with his mother, and in doing so, makes this her story as well.
• This is the story of the first miracle of the redemption: a child in danger of death saved. Milk given from mother to child, rather than from slave to slave holder. (Facebook post)

The cruelty inherent in this layer is even more intense. Mothers whose sons have been killed violently, are forced not only to care for the children of their masters but to nurse them. Not to sit them in a high chair and feed them with a bottle or spoon but to hold them in their arms, and create close physical contact. Horrifying.

In this reality, I think Yocheved plans more carefully than immediately apparent. She does not float the basket in a random place or time. Rather, on the basis of advance information, she picks exactly the spot where Pharaoh’s daughter can be expected to appear. She can’t foretell how Pharaoh’s daughter will react but she counts on a initial motherly instinct, and prepares Miriam to immediately make a carefully rehearsed offer, before compassion is replaced with ethnic or political considerations, or simply respect for her father.

In the face of a cruel regime, resourcefulness and luck are not enough. In order to sow seeds of redemption, sophistication and planning are necessary. Divine Providence does not function in a vacuum but rather through earthly cooperation. We see this again in the next chapter when the seed of redemption begins to sprout.  God announces “I have come down to rescue them from the Egyptians” (3:8) and immediately continues by sending Moses to Pharaoh.

Enslaved in the ultimate exile, Yocheved confronts a reality dictated by others and takes action af al pi chen u’lamrot hakol despite everything and anything. This is the spirit that she bequeathed to the people of Israel in all of our wanderings:

• Despite it all, we built “tower and blockade” settlements. 
• Despite it all, we drained the swamps, paved roads, and made the desert bloom. 
• Despite it all, illegal immigrants arrived by land and sea.

In the spirit of Yocheved, who planned, dared and executed her plan with precision, many seeds of national revival were sown, and we merited Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel

That means – in my opinion – that we should now read at the story from an additional perspective. The perspective of the sovereign.

Pharaoh was a legitimate ruler of Egypt but he went overboard and brought destruction to his land.

This perspective can be difficult for us. For 2000, years we didn’t have the opportunity to think of ourselves as a sovereign power. For 2000 years, we did not have the need or opportunity to test the boundaries between essential self-defense and superfluous power-mongering, between an orderly society and individual rights, and between economic growth and environmental quality. Now, however, those distinctions and many others are critical for our continued life here.

If not now when?

פרשת שמות: מורשתהּ של יוכבד

פרשת שמות: מורשתהּ של יוכבד, תשפ"ג

English

נוכח הציווי הדרקוני "כׇּל־הַבֵּן הַיִּלּוֹד הַיְאֹרָה תַּשְׁלִיכֻהוּ" יוכבד – כמו הורים מְיֻסָּרִים בכל הדורות – נפרדת מבנהּ בתקוה שההקרבה שלה תעניק לו עתיד טוב יותר. במזל או בהשגחה, בדיוק אז בת-פרעה יורדת אל היאור, רואה את התיבה ואת התינוק שבה. על אף שהיא מבינה שהוא מילדי העברים ולכן בן-מוות, היא חומלת עליו. לפני שהיא אומרת בקול שבכוונתהּ לאמץ אותו, האחות צצה מבין סוּף ומציעה להביא "אִשָּׁה מֵינֶקֶת מִן הָעִבְרִיֹּת וְתֵינִק לָךְ אֶת־הַיָּלֶד". בלי התלבטות, בת-פרעה מסכימה, והמשך הסיפור ידוע.

כפי שסיפרתי אותו עכשיו, זה סיפור של עושק ותקווה, מזל שאולי הוא בעצם השגחה, חמלה, תושייה ועוד קצת מזל שאולי גם הוא השגחה. הסוף כל-כך מבטיח שלרגע אפשר לשכח שכל קורה בגלל הגזרה האיומה.

למבט מעמיק יותר, אני פונה אל הָרַבָּה טלי אדלר שמביאה את החיים במלאם אל הטקסט, וכך מגלה רובד חבוי. אני מצטטת:

יש דברים שאינך רואה עד שאת יולדת, משתחררת הביתה למרות שהתינוקת עדיין מאושפזת ולכן נשארת ערה בלילות כדאי לשאוב חלב, כי רק כך תוכלי להיות אם לבתך עד שתבריא. רק אז את מבינה כי:

ברקע, מאחרי הפרקים הראשונים של ספר שמות, מרחפות יולדות ללא תינוקות. אמהות שכולות אשר ילדיהן הושלכו יאורה ושדיהן עדיין מלאות חלב שבניהן לא יזכו לינוק.

 יש מציאות עגומה אחרי השאלה: "הַאֵלֵךְ וְקָרָאתִי לָךְ אִשָּׁה מֵינֶקֶת?" בחברה בו מותר לנוגש לקרוע תינוקות מזרועות אימותיהם אותן הנשים נאלצות לעתים להניק את ילדי העושקים.

לו התורה רצתה לספר רק על הצלתו הנסית של משה, הסיפור היה מסתיים כאשר בת-פערה מוציאה אותו מן היאור. אך התורה בוחרת לספר את ההמשך כי... הסיפור אינו רק של משה אלה גם של אמו...

 הנס הראשון לקראת הגאולה הוא תינוק שהוצל ממוות ואם שמניקה את בנהּ שלה בביתהּ, ולא את בנו של האדון.    סוף ציטוט פורסם בפייסבוק                                                                                                                     

האכזריות המגולמת ברובד הזה כפולה ומשולשת. אמהות שבניהן הומתו בכח, נאלצות לא רק לטפל בילדי האדון אלא להניק אותם. לא להושיב בערסל ולהאכיל עם בקבוק או בכפית אלא להחזיק בזרועות ולייצור מגע גופני ישיר. מחריד.

במציאות כזאת, נראה לי שמעשיה של יוכבד מחושבים יותר מאשר הם נראים תחילה. היא לא משיטה את התיבה במקום ובזמן אקראיים אלא על בסיס מידע מוקדם במקום ובשעה שבת-פרעה צפויה להגיע. היא איננה יכולה לצפות לתגובתהּ של בת-פרעה אבל בונה על אינסטינקט אימהי ראשוני, ומכינה את מרים להכנס לפעולה מיידית, עם הצעה מוכנה מראש, לפני שהחמלה תוחלף בשיקולים אתניים, פוליטיים או כבוד האב. 

מול משטר אכזרי תושיה ומזל אינם מספיקים. לזרוע זרע של גאולה, צריך תחכום ותכנון. גם השגחה אלוהית לא פועלת בריק אלא דרך שיתופי פעולה ארציים. אנחנו רואים את זה גם בהמשך, כאשר זרע הגאולה נובט. בפרק הבא, אלהים אומר "ארד להציל את [העם] מיד מצרים... ועתה ]משה[ תלך אל פרעה" (שמות ג:ח, י).

במצב של עבדות בגולה האולטימטיבית יוכבד מסתכלת במציאות שאחרים מכתיבים לה ופועלת, אף על פי כן ולמרות הכל. זו הרוח שהורישה לעם ישראל בכל נדודיו.

·         אף על פי כן ולמרות הכל: בנינו חומה ומגדל.

·         אף על פי כן ולמרות הכל: יבשנו ביצות, סללנו דרכים והפרחנו את המדבר.

·         אף על פי כן ולמרות הכל: העפלנו מול חופי הארץ.

בזכות רוחהּ של יוכבד: המתכננת, המעיזה והמדייקת בביצוע, נזרעו עוד ועוד זרעים של תקומה וזכינו לריבונות של עם ישראל בארץ ישראל.

וזה מחייב אותנו – לדעתי – להביט בסיפור גם מזווית נוספת. (מי ביקש 70 פנים לתורה ולא קיבל?)
הזווית של הריבון.

שלטונו של פרעה במצרים היה שלטון לגיטימי אבל בכל זאת הוא הגזים והביא הרס על ארצו.

המבט הזה קשה לנו. אלפיים שנה לא הייתה לנו הזדמנות להיות בעמדה של כח שילטוני.

אלפיים שנה לא הייתה לנו הזדמנות, לא היה לנו צורך לבדוק היכן הגבולות בין הגנה עצמית הכרחית וכוחניות מיותרת, בין סדר חברתי וזכויות הפרט, בין כלכלה ואיכות הסביבה.

אך הבחנה נכונה בגבולות אלו ואחרות הכרחית להמשך חיינו כאן.

וְאִם לֹא עַכְשָׁיו, אֵימָתַי?